- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010493532021 NC: 2026:KHC:36770 MFA No. 7047 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.7047 OF 2021 (MV-D) BETWEEN: THE BRANCH MANAGER MAGMA GIC LTD., HMJC ROAD, NEAR MINERVA CIRCLE, BANGALORE NOW REP BY ITS, LEGAL OFFICER, MAGMA HDI GIC LTD., NO.36 II FLOOR, MINERVA CIRCLE, JC ROAD, BANGLAORE - 27. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRADEEP B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. KAVITHA HP W/O LATE C.K. ARUNKUMAR AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS. 2. SURYAGOWDA C.A. W/O LATE C.K. ARUNKUMAR AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS SINCE 2ND RESPONDENT IS MINOR WILL BE REP BY HER MOTHER/NG I.E., 1ST RESPONDENT. Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010493532021 NC: 2026:KHC:36770 MFA No. 7047 of 2021 3. SAROJA, W/O B.N. KRISHNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS. 4. B.N.KRISHNEGOWDA, S/O LATE NINGE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT DARJI BEEDI, NEXT TO PANDURANGA TEMPLE, CHIKKAMAGALURU TOWN. 5. M.M.MANU, S/O MALLESHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/O MARLE VILLAGE, CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK. 6. M.V.RAMESH S/O. VEERABHDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/O MARLE VILLAGE, CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAMESHA M.S., ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-4; R-5 AND R-6 ARE SD AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 21.09.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.469/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MEMBER, MACT, CHIKKAMAGALURU. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010493532021 NC: 2026:KHC:36770 MFA No. 7047 of 2021 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT The Insurance Company has preferred this appeal against the judgment and award in MVC No.469/2018 dated 21.09.2019 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and CJM and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chikkamagaluru (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'). The Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition awarding compensation of Rs.54,54,000/- with 9% interest. 2. In the instance case, the accidental death of one C.K.Arunkumar and the coverage of the insurance policy for the offending truck for the appellant-Insurance Company are not in dispute. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant–Insurance Company contended that the Tribunal erred in awarding compensation by deducting 1/4th of the deceased's income towards personal expenses instead of 1/3rd. It is submitted that the father of the deceased, who was aged about 55 years, could not be treated as a dependent for the purpose of - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010493532021 NC: 2026:KHC:36770 MFA No. 7047 of 2021 determining the deduction towards personal expenses. He also contended that the Tribunal has erred while awarding 9% interest for the compensation instead of 6% as per the law laid down by Division Bench of this Court in MFA No.5896/2018. With these submissions he prays to allow the appeal. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents- claimants contended that the Tribunal upon appreciation of the entire evidence on record, rightly granted the just compensation in all the heads. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the appeal. 5. I have given my anxious consideration both on the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the materials on record. 6. As could be gathered from the records, the Tribunal treated claimant No.4, the father of the deceased, as a dependent of the deceased. A careful perusal of the cross- examination of PW.1 reveals that the Insurance Company has not been able to discard the evidence of PW.1 or establish that claimant No.4 was earning an independent income and was not - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010493532021 NC: 2026:KHC:36770 MFA No. 7047 of 2021 dependent on the earnings of the deceased. In the absence of any such material, the contention of the Insurance Company that claimant No.4 cannot be treated as a dependent is devoid of merit and, accordingly, deserves to be rejected. Insofar as the other contention of the Insurance Company regarding the rate of interest is concerned the Tribunal has awarded interest at 9% per annum instead of 6% per annum, the said issue is no longer res integra. The Division Bench of this Court, in "Ms. Joyeeta Bose and Others vs. Venkateshan V. and Others" in MFA No.5896/2018, has held that in motor accident claim cases, interest on the compensation amount should ordinarily be awarded at the rate of 6% per annum. Placing reliance on the said judgment, this Court is of the considered view that the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal requires modification from 9% per annum to 6% per annum. Thus the claimants are entitled for the total compensation of Rs.54,54,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the claim petition till its realization. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010493532021 NC: 2026:KHC:36770 MFA No. 7047 of 2021 ii. Interest awarded by the Tribunal is modified from the rate of 9% to 6%. ii. The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the Tribunal for disbursement in terms of the award. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE GPG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2